Family Child Care

Registered family child care is an important part of Maryland's child care delivery system. Family child care providers offer child care that most closely resembles the care that children receive in their own homes. Family child care providers care for many children who have special needs or need care during the evening and night. Currently, more than 65% of all infants in regulated care are attended to in family child care homes.

Despite the demand for infant and special needs child care, and intensive provider recruitment efforts in many parts of the state, there are still large numbers of unregistered family child care providers. The primary reasons for this are the lack of incentives that encourage providers to register, the growing disincentives to registration, and parents who are often unaware of the importance of having children in regulated child care settings.

There are many disincentives to registration. Federal regulations remove one strong incentive for registration by requiring that the state subsidize care by relatives and non-relatives in the home of the child even if the person is not registered or licensed. Regulations governing family child care providers have become more stringent as well as increasing the administrative responsibilities and other requirements to become registered. In addition, many family child care providers have complained about the lengthy registration and renewal process, as well as arbitrary interpretations and harsh enforcement of regulations by Office of Child Care licensing specialists.

Fire codes and local building and health codes also deter providers from registration. Permits and inspections add additional costs to the expense of operating a regulated family child care home, but the cost is not the only barrier. Many local and state fire inspectors and local building and health inspectors have little understanding of family child care, and most providers have difficulty understanding fire, zoning and health codes. The process of obtaining a criminal background check also frustrates potential providers. The 1989 General Assembly passed legislation mandating a federal criminal background check for all family child care providers and their family members over 18 years old. The check may take 6-8 months to complete and costs at least $40 per person.

The regulations have increased the average cost of family child care provider registration to approximately $1,000 (without additional expenses for infant/toddler care or modifications to the home). The Family Child Care Provider Grant Program can assist some potential and existing providers with up to $500 to meet regulations; however, the demand far exceeds the available funds.

One obstacle that unregistered providers face when they try to become registered is that they have to close their business during the lengthy registration process. The 1991 General Assembly passed legislation authorizing an amnesty period that would allow unregistered providers to keep their children during the registration process. Over 500 providers registered during the 1991 amnesty period. In 1994, the General Assembly passed legislation which established a similar amnesty initiative for three years. Between October 1994 and July 1997, 462 providers signed registration agreements.

Although there is still a need for infant/toddler care, family child care providers can only take two children under the age of two, including their own children under two-years-old. The 1991 Maryland General Assembly passed legislation that allows family child care providers to care for four infants if two adult care givers are in the home. However, the cost of the additional staff person may far exceed the additional revenue that the provider will earn.

FOF/MCC has long championed increasing provider compensation, improving child care working conditions, and enhancing the quality of child care in Maryland. Nevertheless, one of the most difficult challenges of the 2006 and 2007 General Assembly Sessions was posed by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), which ostensibly embraced the same goals in seeking to create the framework for the unionization of family child care providers. In late 2005, SEIU decided to pursue legislation toward that end, despite objections raised by FOF/MCC about an already crowded early childhood Session agenda and the potential for the issue to fracture the State’s family child care community.

Although FOF/MCC and the Maryland State Family Child Care Association (MSFCCA) continued a dialogue with SEIU, these concerns proved to be well-founded. The legislation introduced in early February 2006, with large numbers of sponsors in both chambers of the General Assembly, was lengthy and exceedingly complex. It presented numerous issues that threatened not only provider unity but also the ability of the Purchase of Care (POC) program to meet the needs of Maryland’s families and the integrity of Maryland’s system of child care regulation. When a House hearing was abruptly scheduled before the Public Policy Committee had reached a final position, the State Legislation Subcommittee was polled, and its recommendation was presented to FOF/MCC’s Board of Directors. The Board voted unanimously to oppose the legislation.

While upholding the right of providers to join a union if they choose, and while championing the goal of increasing provider compensation, FOF/MCC pointed out that most child care programs had only just been transferred to the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE), with POC slated to follow in July of 2006. Moreover, MSDE had just issued the report of the POC Study Group, which explicitly proposed raising POC reimbursement rates over the next three years. FOF/MCC argued that MSDE deserved the right to incorporate the POC program without new and unnecessary restrictions and the chance to implement the recommendations of the Study Group in a way that balanced the needs and goals of parents and children as well as providers. Lobbying was intense, but FOF/MCC, MSFCCA, and their allies prevailed. Ultimately, the legislation was withdrawn in the Senate. In the House, the legislation was voted down overwhelming by two committees, with one recommending summer study.

As in 2006, much of the 2007 Session was consumed by controversy over the SEIU proposal. The legislation differed in some respects from the previous year’s version, but it still posed numerous threats to the ability of the Child Care Subsidy Program (as POC has been renamed) to meet the needs of Maryland’s families. For the second consecutive year, FOF/MCC’s Board voted unanimously to oppose the legislation.

As FOF/MCC noted, MSDE had already explicitly endorsed raising provider reimbursement rates, despite SEIU assertions that providers would need the union’s “voice” to achieve such an outcome. In fact, FOF/MCC analysis showed that some providers would see a net loss in income under SEIU fee structures imposed in other states. This could lead those providers to simply refuse to serve subsidized children, constricting the access of low-income families to affordable, quality child care. Virtually all of the State’s child care and early education community again joined FOF/MCC in opposition. MSFCCA, in particular, mounted a resourceful and carefully strategized campaign among its members. Vigorous lobbying by both sides dominated the first two months of the 2007 Session. Hearings took place in mid-March. Sine Die adjournment arrived with no further action taken, and the legislation thus died once again.

On August 6, 2007, Governor O’Malley issued an Executive Order establishing the framework of an election process through which a union can claim “meet and confer” bargaining status with the State on behalf of both registered and informal family child care providers participating in the Child Care Subsidy Program. The Executive Order did not establish a mechanism for a union to collect fees from nonmembers, nor did it provide for binding arbitration in the event of negotiation impasses. A September 2007 election organized by the Department of Labor, Licensing, and Regulation resulted in an SEIU victory, although fewer than 30% of eligible providers voted. The Executive Order faced a series of legal challenges, which called the election results into question. On March 9, 2009 the Maryland Court of Special Appeals ruled that the Governor’s Executive Order was legally issued, and the legal battle came to an end. FOF/MCC’s chief concern is the integrity of the Child Care Subsidy Program and Maryland’s system of child care more generally. As of August 2009, contract negotiations are ongoing.

Position

FOF/MCC will work for policies that encourage the expansion of family child care by recruiting new providers and retaining career providers. This includes: supporting funding to enhance local and statewide family child care recruitment activities and technical assistance for providers; supporting the efforts of family child care associations to assist potential and existing providers; continuing and increasing the funding for the family child care grant program and considering the development of a family child care loan program for more costly renovations; and developing other incentives to retain registered providers. While upholding the right of child care providers to make their own well-informed decisions in any union election process, FOF/MCC should continue to monitor and address the challenges posed by union activity in the child care arena. Insofar as possible, dialogue among all parties should remain open, but under any circumstances, the State’s commitment to quality care and a strong regulatory system must be maintained.

Legislative Priorities | Legislative Scorecard | MCC's Subcommittees | POC subsidy program | ACTION ALERTS | Advocacy Guide | EIC Campaign

for parents | for employers | search for licensed child care | search for out-of-school activities | for child care providers | for out-of-school providers | public policy | data collection | general information | resources/publications | for trainers | Maryland Child Care Resource Network | home| contact us | privacy policy